The Big Fight, Live!
It’s the event we’ve all been waiting for, SeaWeb’s journalists vs. scientists bloodfest, endearingly entitled…
Can this relationship be saved? If the intros are anything to go by, it’s touch and go.
We hear that Ken Weiss has just won a Pullitzer prize. Beat that, boffins…
There’s plenty of humor on both sides… for now
We start with “True Confessions… Coming out of the Ivory Tower”. A plethora of scientists explain on camera how they got their fingers, and in some cases toes, truly toasted by the press. And not in a good, drink-laden way.
Nancy kicks in. Scientists and journalists have lots in common, she tells us. We almost believe her. Scientists are obsessive compulsives, journalists have ADD. But that’s a difference. Ah, but we all like to stay up late and drink.
Here we go: in common, a thirst for knowledge. Driving us apart, the desire to communicate.
Scientists thrive in a world of uncertainty, journalists need definite statements. In short, scientists are rational, journalists are emotional.
“Scientists”, Nancy says, don’t think about your peers. Think about the bigger world, who you want to care about your passion. Go on, you know it makes sense.
Scientists’ perceptions of journos are pretty negative, but justifiably. Journos are equally scathing of scientists. So far, we’ve established that we don’t trust each other. That’s not a good start, but not entirely unexpected.
Finally, we go to the panel. The guy from Maine asks “how do you cope with being bored?”. Tim Radford jumps on it. It’s a challenge he relishes.
Andrew Scientist loves it when he’s asked if there’s anything he’d like to retract. Hmm. Nice idea. Might try that one.
Fiji Journo loves it when scientists let him do his job. “Because I can’t do their’s” he says. The audience laughs.
DanSci loves it, period. He tells a long anecdote about how he sussed that a journo who was interviewing him was an English major. But no one’s sure why. Funny though.
PeteSci from the UK loves it when he gets feedback from journos.
SteveHack loves it when scientists make themselves available. Robert Winston took his call when he was skiing down a mountain, it would seem. It’s a tough life juggling the twin demands of being a leading IVF expert (pardon the pun) and a Born Again Christian. Sometimes only a weekend retreat to Val d’Isere will do.
TimHack isn’t too keen when scientists aren’t spontaneous.
MaineSci likes it when hacks do their homework.
A pattern is emerging here. There’s lots of things we love about each other.
PullizerKen likes snappy headlines. Summing it up in a catchy way. You know who you are.
ChristinaHack likes field trips — “The shield on the armour comes down” and that’s when we really get to know what the scientist is up to.
DonovanHost says it’s all getting too cosy. He wanders into the crowd and hands the mic to Jeremy Jackson. He wants to know whether journos feel trapped by the pressures they’re under: the need to find opposing opinions etc.
Question from the rabble: should journos make sure the “expert” they’re talking to is actually an expert in the thing they’re talking about. TimHack responds. He tried to write non-controversial headlines once. Didn’t get ‘im far. We don’t want a sermonizing press, he says.
Next question: preamble about scientists not having time to “waste” talking to journos when there are papers to write, grants to submit, blah blah.
NancySci says, maybe, decades ago. She rightly points to the kudos (hate that word, but in a hurry) that’s now attached to activity in the popular press.
The Rabble again: to the scientists, is accuracy of statement more important than the underlying message? DanSci tackles that one. The need for accurate information is greater than ever, he says. We shouldn’t make inaccurate or exaggerated claims, he says. I’m guessing he thinks there’s plenty of other people to do that.
Rabble: What makes a good story?
ChristinaHack: what’s the human dimension? Why is the scientist interested in that particular thing?
Donovan: And for TV, it’s got to be visual.
Well, yes. Otherwise it’s radio.
RabbleFromVenezuela: You journalists are my heroes.
(Being a journalist in Venezuala is not exactly a safe occupation) We thank you. The feeling is mutual.
How do the boffins feel about being made the focus of the story? Cautionary tale from PaulSci, who apparently got into a muddle about parrot fish pornography just recently. The mind boggles.
JJSci: Why do we have to treat readers like idiots?
(I’m paraphrasing, but you get the drift)
PullizerHack: Because they are. (See disclaimer above)
‘Nuff said though. There is a serious point, but you’ll have to think about it.
We’re talking about Paris Hilton now. She gets around.
TimHack paints an Aladdinesque view of things, saying that the press is hostage to popular opinion. He’s right, you know.
Rabble: In the past it used to be a bit distasteful for scientists to talk to the press. Now it’s all the rage.
MaineSci points to the impact Jacques Cousteau managed to have. It wasn’t by writing papers. It was by wearing small swimming costumes and bobbing around in even smaller submersibles.
Wow. DanSci has a Hippocratic oath for the oceans, according to Nancy. He denies it, but goes on to explain that actually he does subscribe to something along those lines.
Rabble: How do we start a relationship with you journalists?
TimHack: Gently.
SteveHack: By jumping in and doing it yourself.
Oh no! We hacks in the audience have just been told to stand up and identify ourselves. Nowhere to hide now… that was a low blow, Nancy.
Rabble: long question about time lag between a story happening and it being broken.
TimHack sympathizes. As do we all.
RabbleHack: extraordinarily long preamble. I’m seriously worried about the battery on my lappy…
…nope. Still no sign of a question. Or even an anecdote…
Time passes.
… Still waiting. Now she’s answering other people’s questions. She’s supposed to be asking them…
Zzz.
Phew. Nancy rescues us! She appears to be wrapping it up. Must be looking forward to a glass of wine.
Come on, Nancy. Oh, she’s talking about hacks losing their jobs. Ah, it’s a PR thing. Any jobs going at University press offices?
Summing up time. Where are the drinks, DonovanHack asks. His real name is Jeff.
Hacks: Don’t work in a vacuum. Talk to us. We’re the only way you can communicate with the real world.
TimHack doesn’t pass up an opportunity to bash Margaret Thatcher. Sweet.
ChristinaHack wants to know if anyone has anything they want to retract. Rabble laughs appreciatively.
Boffins: MainePaul starts talking a bit jargony. Don’t spoil things now, Paul. He goes on a bit, but finishes by talking about being honest but not depressing. Sort of picked the wrong career, me ol’ marine biologist matey.
GuyInGreenShirt (who hasn’t said a word so far) suddenly has loads to say. It’s flooding out. Let the hacks tell the story! They’re good at it!
Thanks, GIGS.
DanSci gives us a bit of a sermon, but it’s well meaning and gets a round of applause. Time for a beer, guys.
OK, we’re done here. It’s a draw. I reckon we’ve all Learned To Stop Worrying And Love Each Other. At least for now.
Ladies and Gentlemen, good night. PS. this blog entry was written in a single take and posted without being edited. Please don’t hate me. At the least this demonstrates why we need editors.
Leave a Reply